Could Democrats capture Tea Party fever?

posted at 2:55 pm on January 4, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

This weekend’s results from Rasmussen on party identification raise an interesting question.  Can Democrats exploit Tea Party fervor to keep seats in Congress?  A.C. Kleinheider takes a look at Tennessee, where some of those battles will be fought in 2010:

Gov. Phil Bredesen was unique in his ability to out-Republican a GOP opponent and get away with it. Progressives are right when they say that there’s no point in trying to be Republican lite. Given the choice between a Democrat acting like a Republican and a real Republican, voters will choose the Republican. But that doesn’t mean that Democrats need to come at the electorate with a standard-issue liberal portfolio either.

This tea party movement, this seething anger, is being driven and co-opted by Republicans. But at its core, the outrage isn’t ideological. It isn’t even necessarily anti-government. It’s just anti-this-government.

Those caught up in tea party hysteria are the kind of voters Ross Perot captured in 1992. Two years later, without Perot, these foaming, vaguely culturally conservative, middle-income voters went Republican.

But these voters, unlike their tea party activist manipulators, don’t give a damn about Edmund Burke, Ludwig Von Mises or Ayn Rand. They want jobs and a government that makes sense to them — that’s it. As long as Democratic candidates don’t explicitly agitate their culturally conservative sensibilities and can deflect the appeals Republicans make on those hot-button social issues, these voters can be won over with economic arguments.

Jazz Shaw made a similar argument after seeing the Rasmussen numbers.  After all, while Democrats have dropped to their lowest level of partisan identification in years, Republicans don’t appear to be picking up significant converts, either.  The radical agenda of Nancy Pelosi has repelled voters, but Republicans have not yet taken advantage, probably due to a lack of a national platform.

However, I’d be highly skeptical of the notion that Democrats can capture Tea Party fever.  The Tea Party movement has come almost entirely as a reaction to the Pelosi agenda and the Obama attempt to force it through Congress.  Movement adherents may not dig von Mises or Burke, but they also know that higher taxes and larger government interventions have come from Democrats much more than Republicans.  The basic impulse of anti-incumbency hits Democrats more than Republicans, and especially Democratic leadership.  Given the supine nature of Blue Dogs in the House health-care vote in November, people understand that the corrective to the Pelosi agenda is not to send more Democrats to Congress.

The true impact of the Tea Party movement will be felt in Republican primaries more than general elections — and perhaps in Democratic primaries, although that seems less likely.  Conservatives will flood the zone looking for fiscal conservatives and smaller-government candidates, attempting to thwart the Pelosi-Reid-Obama agenda before it can get passed in Congress.  That explicitly relies on getting Nancy Pelosi out of the speaker’s chair, which means electing non-Democrats.  At least for now, that also means Republicans, but that doesn’t mean that the GOP can become complacent.  They need to focus like a laser on those issues that unite the Tea Party activists, Republican establishment, and independents disgusted with the excesses of one-party Democratic governance in Washington.  If they can do that, Republicans can recapture the House and put a big dent in the Democratic majority in the Senate.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

You can’t win merely being against stuff.

blatantblue on January 4, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Who sez? The Dems won entirely by being against Bush.

John the Libertarian on January 4, 2010 at 3:51 PM

Democrats (and many Republicans) will SAY they are for small government, low taxes and no Earmarks when they voted for Porkulus, the bailouts and deathcare.

The good news is that the Tea Party folks local to me are going to call BS on that real quick.

The question is when they state that they are “Endorsed by the Tea Party of XXX” and it is just an AKA for thier PAC, will the media report the BS?

barnone on January 4, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM

This is a bunch of angry old men?

Try again.

kingsjester on January 4, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Living in the South, I saw what happen when people with strong ties to the democrat party change to the Republican party. They don’t change back.
jeannie on January 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Good point. I was a Yankee Democrat whose family was heavily involved with Democrat politics, serving as Congressmen and so forth, going back to the late 1800s. My father began to ease out of the party by voting for Perot shortly before he died, and I switched to the GOP in 1993 and would nevah, evah change back. I’m also very happy to be living in the South now, and as much as I love going back home, It’s almost unbearable to endure cocktail party chatter about BushMcHitler and DarthCheney.

Buy Danish on January 4, 2010 at 3:54 PM

The tea party people may as well just be called the common sense party, because all they are doing is standing up for commonsense principles. If you can’t afford it, don’t buy it, majority rules, small government needs less money which equals less taxes, property rights, self-preservation, protect the country etc.

royzer on January 4, 2010 at 3:55 PM

The assumptions made about tea partiers are really laughable. The left seems to think of us as knuckle-dragging bigots, and too many on the right make blanket statements.

The only thing you can really say about us is we are unhappy Americans. I know folks with massive educations who are tea partiers, saw every imaginable kind of person at those I attended. Many of those I know personally are professional people. Why make assumptions about their knowledge of Locke? What difference does it make? How many libs read Locke? What matters is tea partiers are voters, taxpayers, upset, and motivated.

jodetoad on January 4, 2010 at 3:55 PM

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM

This is a bunch of angry old men?

Try again.

kingsjester on January 4, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Ridicule is all they have. So we’re all angry old white guy racist homophobes. *yawn*

John the Libertarian on January 4, 2010 at 3:57 PM

What burns me are the number of Republicans who are happy to take Conservative money and votes, but then would prefer Conservatives to shut up and fall in line, because they don’t really believe in anything Conservative. Mitch McConnell and Bob Bennett come to mind, among others.

The Tea Parties need to dedicate themselves not only to removing Democrats but Republican turncoats as well. I’m sick of congressmen and senators that talk a good line but stab voters in the back at every turn.

2010 can’t come soon enough for me.

hachiban on January 4, 2010 at 3:59 PM

I think alot will depend on the quality of the candidates running.

Independents aren’t going to be comfortable voting for someone who has no record or who doesn’t seem ready for the job.

AnninCA on January 4, 2010 at 4:04 PM

But at its core, the outrage isn’t ideological. It isn’t even necessarily anti-government. It’s just anti-this-government.

Bull. It is ‘ideological’, i.e. it’s based on (at least an elementary) understanding of the ideas that have created the current crises. It is “anti” a certain kind of government – the kind you get by following those ideas. And, most obviously, it is “anti” much more than the just the current government. It’s simply more opposed to this one because this one represents and acts on those ideas much more consistently than any other in history. (And, given the Wilson and FDR administrations, that’s saying something.)

The Tea Party movement is about freedom, as an idea and a reachable practical goal. What it is “anti” is anything that is anti-freedom.

JDPerren on January 4, 2010 at 4:05 PM


pjean on January 4, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Great video- thanks for the link!

huskerdiva on January 4, 2010 at 4:05 PM

I think alot will depend on the quality of the candidates running.

AnninCA on January 4, 2010 at 4:04 PM

I think a lot will depend on whether someone has a (D) after their name. Democrats are toxic and more and more people are beginning to realize that.

darwin on January 4, 2010 at 4:09 PM

AnninCA on January 4, 2010 at 4:04 PM

Independents aren’t going to be comfortable voting for someone who has no record or who doesn’t seem ready for the job.

HaAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHH!!

Whew!! That was a good one.

err….you were joking, right?

Troll Feeder on January 4, 2010 at 4:09 PM

If people want to get rid of Pelosi, they will have to get rid of the Democrats. I don’t care what particular Democrat says that we need to balance the budget or whatever. We have seen what happened with those blue dogs, like Ellsworth here in Indiana, when push comes to shove.

So some Democrat might say all the right things but so long as their leadership continues to be comprised of people like Pelosi and Reid things will not change.

Terrye on January 4, 2010 at 4:10 PM

Independents aren’t going to be comfortable voting for someone who has no record or who doesn’t seem ready for the job.

AnninCA on January 4, 2010 at 4:04 PM

She musta missed Obama’s Resume… or… lack there of?

Romeo13 on January 4, 2010 at 4:13 PM

So some Democrat might say all the right things but so long as their leadership continues to be comprised of people like Pelosi and Reid things will not change.

Terrye on January 4, 2010 at 4:10 PM

In 2008, my mother voted for Mary Landrieu (D). She did not like the Republican on the ticket and neither did I. She said that she votes for the person and not the party.

Over Christmas my mother realized that though SHE voted for the person not the party, Mary voted Party not the People.

Lesson 2: GOP, don’t put idiots on the ticket and people will vote for them.

barnone on January 4, 2010 at 4:23 PM

Juxtapose the following.

Could Democrats capture Tea Party fever?

and

This tea party movement, this seething anger, is being driven and co-opted by Republicans

Ed,
I don’t think the dhimmicraps are going to capture anything. The basic premise of a dhimmicrap is ‘please tell me what to think, how to act, and make sure it’s always somebody else’s fault’.
This is STARK contrast with conservative values like ‘don’t tell me what to think, say, or do, I’ll decide for myself.’ and ‘I take full responsibility for me and I insist you take responsibility for you.’
 
Also, I really appreciate the ‘co-opt’ snark from the DNC. I can count on one hand (*thumbs nose at dhimmicraps*) the number of Republicans that have been embraced by the Tea Party crowd. Half of them are from Oklahoma.

Blacksmith8 on January 4, 2010 at 4:48 PM

Independents aren’t going to be comfortable voting for someone who has no record or who doesn’t seem ready for the job.

AnninCA on January 4, 2010 at 4:04 PM

Just when I thought it was safe to scroll on by, there’s Ann with the ultimate SNARK of the the day.
(*bows*)
Your snark-fu is greater than my own.

Blacksmith8 on January 4, 2010 at 4:50 PM

with the out of control spending, the rising unemployment, not a chance.

tarpon on January 4, 2010 at 4:50 PM

2010 can’t come soon enough for me.

hachiban on January 4, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Don’t look now, but it’s 2010. “insert cute little smiley here”

MarkTheGreat on January 4, 2010 at 4:54 PM

Independents aren’t going to be comfortable voting for someone who has no record or who doesn’t seem ready for the job.

AnninCA on January 4, 2010 at 4:04 PM

Didn’t stop them from voting for Obama.

MarkTheGreat on January 4, 2010 at 4:55 PM

Time to start articulating more properly what our PLAN is for healthcare, not only why Obarfy’s plan is wrong.

blatantblue on January 4, 2010 at 3:01 PM

Republicans are not supposed to have a plan on health care because it’s not a proper purpose of government to be involved in the creation, distribution, or payment of health care products and services. That is beyond their enumerated Constitutional powers and is wholly impractical anyway. Socialism doesn’t work and Fascism works even less well.

What any rational, moral Republican should be for, and should be articulating is that freedom is both good and practical. The purpose of the Federal government is fundamentally to protect certain rights – basically the rights to life, liberty, and property not the non-existent right to a living at the expense of someone else’s liberty to be paid for by another’s property.

JDPerren on January 4, 2010 at 4:59 PM

pjean on January 4, 2010 at 3:50 PM

WOW! Whoever made this should be running the ad campaigns for the Conservatives to win in November.

America Rising: An Open Letter to Democrat Politicians

Blacksmith8 on January 4, 2010 at 5:00 PM

No government or small government is an unattainable goal. Therefore, the Tea Party movement is no different than a bunch of angry old men trying to send back cold soup in a diner.

They have no agenda, no platform, no solutions, no goals whatsoever. They are just a angry mob of hate. Nothing more, nothing less.

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM

I don’t believe D is even trying to be serious. It just throws out DNC one liners, then runs for cover. It never attempts to debate the concepts it champions. Just toss and run. Awhile latter, toss another one liner, then go back to hiding in the weeds. Far as we know, it could be a post bot, timed to go off every few hours.

MarkTheGreat on January 4, 2010 at 5:02 PM

There are a few Democrats attracted to the Tea Pary Movement, but not all that many. The ones that are have a little more commonsense than most Dems. Capturing Tea Party fever? NOT.

I have to agree with Hawkdriver on this one. There should be absolutely no role for government in our health care. The Republicans should have exactly zero plans for it. Health care is not a right, it is a commodity. People keep forgetting that. This fight is not about healthcare, it is about expanding government.

BetseyRoss on January 4, 2010 at 5:03 PM

What would Democrat Teaparty folks gather to promote? More of other people’s money or just free stuff?

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2010 at 5:04 PM

What would Democrat Teaparty folks gather to promote? More of other people’s money or just free stuff?

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2010 at 5:04 PM

Replace ‘tea’ with ‘fist’.

daesleeper on January 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM

Independents aren’t going to be comfortable voting for someone who has no record or who doesn’t seem ready for the job.

AnninCA on January 4, 2010 at 4:04 PM

She musta missed Obama’s Resume… or… lack there of?

Romeo13 on January 4, 2010 at 4:13 PM

Romeo appears so.

CWforFreedom on January 4, 2010 at 5:06 PM

The only “angry mob of hate” I see in America today is the almalgamation of a$$holes in the Democratic Party, especially the progressive wing. I hope they eat each other alive. Good riddance Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi!

NathanG on January 4, 2010 at 5:07 PM

Kleinheider must be smoking some of that middle Tn meth.

The notion that Tn Democrats, including the pretty boy state senator who is pictured in his article, can win much of anything in 2010 is preposterous.

I would like to place some wagers with Mr. Kleinheider.

And tea parties are anti-government, not simply anti-this government.

And Barack and Congress haven’t even gotten to the odious(and immeasurably unpopular) business of increasing taxes.

When they do, their favorability ratings will plummet even further.

The Republican Party is for big government.

The Democratic Party is for bigger government.

The tea baggers, who will convene in Nashville next month, are for a very limited government.

And Mike Padgett was the Knox County Register of Deeds, not exactly Senatorial material. He didn’t even mention his party on his 2008 myspace page.

Kleinheider may be trying to spin a very likely electoral disaster and thereby change the inevitable, but it certainly won’t work.

molonlabe28 on January 4, 2010 at 5:09 PM

Sure they can. LOL

LibTired on January 4, 2010 at 5:16 PM

Republicans are not supposed to have a plan on health care because it’s not a proper purpose of government to be involved in the creation, distribution, or payment of health care products and services.

JDPerren on January 4, 2010 at 4:59 PM

Having no plan means leaving the current situation in place. We do need to have plans to roll back govt interference in health care. However, we don’t need to articulate any such plans now. Doing so runs the risk of getting us distracted into internecine warfare over which alternative plan is better, which part of the govt interference should be gotten rid of first.

Our one and only goal right now is to stop the beast that the Democrats have created. Once that task is accomplished, we can afford to distract ourselves talking about what the next step should be.

MarkTheGreat on January 4, 2010 at 5:19 PM

Ann, I’m not trying to be a smartass, I’m actually interested in your reasoning on this: how do you square “Independents aren’t going to be comfortable voting for someone who has no record or who doesn’t seem ready for the job.” with Obama being elected?

LooseCannon on January 4, 2010 at 5:19 PM

Don’t look now, but it’s 2010. “insert cute little smiley here”

MarkTheGreat on January 4, 2010 at 4:54 PM

Yeah, well, it’s only January. It’s going to be a long 10 months and I’m chomping at the bit. I’d willingly walk barefoot over hot coals to vote against Babs Boxer on November 2nd. I have never spent a more horrible year than 2009.

hachiban on January 4, 2010 at 5:20 PM

I think the tea partiers have kept it pretty open, and have not closed the door on independents and liberals…they want answers, they want responsibility, they want their representatives to react to their constituents…that appeals to everyone, liberal and conservative.
Now it is a conservative driving the demonstrations, but as time evolves, and more and more the missteps of the administration is brought to light, more independents, then some liberals will embrace the outrage that actually crosses party line…and that is how it should be.
The best thing conservative talk show hosts, and conservative congress should do is assist, support, but step aside and not take the spotlight from the real tea partiers.

right2bright on January 4, 2010 at 5:30 PM

What would Democrat Teaparty folks gather to promote? More of other people’s money or just free stuff?

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2010 at 5:04 PM

I really think that if they are not “locked out” they will participate. I think many are not happy with how the administration is working, they voted for a “change” and they are not getting it.
I think the majority voting for Obama expected him to actually reach across the aisle, open the debates, be public in the meetings, and he is not doing that.
They may have different views as us conservatives, but many want an open process…and they are beginning to realize they are not getting it.
It sounds cliche, but it is almost exactly Orwell’s 1984, Napoleon has been banned, and the Pigs are looking more and more like the “humans”…
The hard nose liberals who post here, are not any indication of what the “soft” liberals and independents feel, they are seeing that the “change” is not the change promised or hoped for.

right2bright on January 4, 2010 at 5:36 PM

This all seems to be a lot of worry about a movement that is supposed to be “astroturf” and “racist”.

Can the Democrats exploit tea party fever? Hell no.

Can the supreme leader of Iran exploit the gangs in the streets protesting him in Tehran?

Not a chance.

HondaV65 on January 4, 2010 at 5:41 PM

That explicitly relies on getting Nancy Pelosi out of the speaker’s chair, which means electing non-Democrats.

Right on ED – this is exactly right.

HondaV65 on January 4, 2010 at 5:42 PM

Having no plan means leaving the current situation in place.

MarkTheGreat on January 4, 2010 at 5:19 PM

I agree substantially with your post, but we’re running into a semantic difficulty here. “No plan for health care” does not mean (in the context of my post) “no plan for how to get the Feds out of planning our health care system.”

That plan, whatever it will look like, is the same as the plan to get them out of the energy businesses, the finance businesses, the education business, and on down the line.

That plan, far from being a distraction, is identical with rolling back the leviathan in every sphere of private life where they have no business interfering.

Changing the ratio of R’s to D’s in DC is, in the end, a very small part of that goal.

JDPerren on January 4, 2010 at 6:05 PM

This argument says two things:

1. Tea party members are clueless and just like shouting
2. Liberal Dems are not part of the anger

If you believe that, go with it Dems. See how far it takes you.

angryed on January 4, 2010 at 6:06 PM

Yea. Love HA evaluations of polls and how conservative values suck because it’s not political policies that matter, it’s about being nonpartisan or Democrat or Republican. It’s SO OBVIOUS Teapartyers believe that new or reused Democrats they could vote into office will most definitely follow their lead exactly as they see it. They’ll surely improve unemployment, reduce taxes, get us out of the Healthcare debacle, stop cap and trade, improve the housing market, help states balance their budgets, lower government spending, and reduce the deficit. Yep! Clear as day!

Sultry Beauty on January 4, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Tea Party people see Democrats as lepers. After being denigrated by Democrats, I fail to see how any of them will be ‘embraced’. Unless it’s with a noose!

GarandFan on January 4, 2010 at 6:26 PM

This is a bunch of angry old men?

Try again.

kingsjester on January 4, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Oh, you are right. Looks like a modern day KKK rally.

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Were you recruited by Kleagle Byrd (D)?

daesleeper on January 4, 2010 at 6:32 PM

don’t give a damn about Edmund Burke, Ludwig Von Mises or Ayn Rand.

Movement adherents may not dig von Mises or Burke, but they also know that higher taxes and larger government interventions have come from Democrats much more than Republicans.

ed, like the democrats he aspires to be part of the “club” with, thinks all of us who attended the Tea Parties are stupid rabel. ed already considers himself a part of the political elite. Wake up, ed.

peacenprosperity on January 4, 2010 at 7:21 PM

huskerdiva on January 4, 2010 at 4:05 PM

OT
Are you still going on the 16th? I think OC is signed up.

yoda on January 4, 2010 at 7:46 PM

“Seething anger”…”tea party hysteria”…”foaming”

?

That writer obviously is working with a full quiver of pre-conceived cliches. From the first tea party that I attended back on April 15, what I witnessed was people from assorted political affiliations who were fed up with the runaway spending, the out-of-control seizure of federal power, the threat of the loss of our liberties and privacy, the sure raising of our taxes combined with crushing debt and a devalued dollar, and the lack of government accountability.

Obviously the person had not attended any events personally, or he would have found the attendees quite conversant on pertinent points of the Constitution

and well aware of quotable points from “The Federalist Papers

. Rand and a number of quotations from the Founding Fathers shaped the message of the speakers and the signs on display.

Tea parties sprang up from the grassroots and by word of mouth, as well as through Internet shout outs. They were not organized by “activist manipulators” nor party leaders. Because of their growing size and impact, state and national leaders began to assist in the organization.

Those politicians who flew in the face of the guiding principles of the tea parties through unrepresentative voting and fiscal profligacy were booed and shouted down.

Citizen patriots who were once the silent majority had found their voices. They sought redress from a government that is taxing them but not representing them. They will continue to do so until our elected leaders respect us as their employers.

When citizens cannot reach their representatives and senators by phone, fax, or email, and when votes do not reflect the opinions of those citizens, then the complacent legislators and executives had better plan on finding a new job.

onlineanalyst on January 4, 2010 at 7:52 PM

I goofed up on my tags, but my points still stand.

onlineanalyst on January 4, 2010 at 7:53 PM

People who voted for Hope & Change and transparency got the shaft from the Democrat party and Obama. These voters will not be easily fooled again, come election day.

The Tea Party movement was born out of frustration with an over-reaching government which began during TARP I, on Bush’s watch. It has built into a national movement made up of largely first-time activist (like myself) and in the face of non-stop criticism from the media, Democrat leadership, and Obama himself. Yet the Tea Party is still alive and taking an active roll in 2010/2012!

TN Mom on January 4, 2010 at 8:05 PM

No government or small government is an unattainable goal. Therefore, the Tea Party movement is no different than a bunch of angry old men trying to send back cold soup in a diner.

They have no agenda, no platform, no solutions, no goals whatsoever. They are just a angry mob of hate. Nothing more, nothing less.

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Please keep believing this nonsense

bill30097 on January 4, 2010 at 8:06 PM

Could the Democrats capture Tea Party fever? Only if you believe the Nazis can capture the Jewish vote.

MeAlice on January 4, 2010 at 8:14 PM

The writer is aware that Democrat (Blue Dog) John Tanner and Bart Gordon- both Tennessee US Congressman- have announced that they will not seek re-election? Tanner has never faced a serious challenger and now he’s bailing out. I expect more and more Dems to do likewise or face a costly and embarrassing defeat.

TN Mom on January 4, 2010 at 8:15 PM

blatantblue on January 4, 2010 at 3:15 PM

A lot of that tea party agitation began after the election because taxpaying voters were seeing wasteful bailouts that had weak accountability, bloated “stimulus” plans that were not going to stimulate the economy but would only serve as political payback, and promises of social programs that were going to raise taxes and intrude on our freedoms.

The administation and Congress were not demonstrating any fiscal restraint. They were adopting failed Keynesian policies to prime the pump instead of creating the conditions for job growth via tax cuts for businesses/corporations and via dismantling of strangling regulation. The decisions to block our development of energy resources was another sore spot since the opportunity for good jobs directly and peripherally (to say nothing re national security) hinges on our ability to drill and mine and build.

onlineanalyst on January 4, 2010 at 8:15 PM

Give it up, Ed.

The fact remains that todays GOP is the party that kicked conservatives to the curb, and the man most responsible for that is the titular leader of the Republican Party, Juan McAmnesty. As long as that holds true we will see the Tea Party Patriots focus on local elections in an effort to remove the RINO’s.

The Tea Party Patriots succeeded in shutting down the GOP’s effort at placing a HUGE RINO into Congress in the NY 23 elections. The Tea Party Patriots have succeeded in taking back the reigns from the RINO’s running the local GOP in at least one state so far [Arizona?], and this effort will continue as we take back our country.

The once fracured groups have come together, and their message will be clear within a few more weeks. In the meantime, the dates are being sent out for the future protests, and we all expect to see more people get involved.

The third party already exists today, but they won’t be running third party candidates. They will be supporting Republican candidates who are Conservative.

Thank you 0bama, and McCain. Without your efforts this would never have happened. ;o)

DannoJyd on January 5, 2010 at 12:15 AM

DannoJyd on January 5, 2010 at 12:15 AM

Accurate and acute. Dems cannot comprehend individuals acting to a shared goal.
Their way is coercion or corruption. Their goals are subjugation not liberation.
The Tea Parties are joyous gatherings of like minded individuals. Just look. People who are confident in their ability to control their own lives and are not about to allow some usurper entry. The Tea Parties are a warning; a polite gentle but firm warning. From folks who have accomplishments and can repeat success in other areas. The Gadsden flag is a cliche but the first Navel Jack is the flag of the fleet.
The left cannot show their face but conservatives always rejoice at just being alive. And there is no way that can be kept down.

Caststeel on January 5, 2010 at 2:55 AM

Tea Baggers are people who are afraid of a Black President. It has nothing to do with Democrats or taxes or any other so called reason for their being.

Not all Republicans are racists but all racists are Republican. Therefore, Tea Baggers will always be Republican.

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Let’s see – Obama is taking away our freedoms one at a time. He’s bankrupting the country. He’s destroying the best healthcare system in the world. He’s taking away the incentive to start your own business. Etc, etc, etc.

But you’re right – we’d be just fine with that if Obama were white.

Idiot.

Squiggy on January 5, 2010 at 6:11 AM

As one who has attended over 16 TEA Parties, has picketed a senator and my Reps office and 4 times a week Stands Up For Freedom at 3 different Freedom Corners, no one manipulates me, period. Any big government, big spending and taxing candidate is not getting my support regardless of party. I want to hear from candidates who want to cut government and spending in all of the nanny state areas; and with YouTube we will have a record of their commitments. If they lie, I will be back on the street corners cutting them no slack. Actions not words are what I and others are looking for.

amr on January 5, 2010 at 9:18 AM

The administation and Congress were not demonstrating any fiscal restraint. They were adopting failed Keynesian policies to prime the pump instead of creating the conditions for job growth via tax cuts for businesses/corporations and via dismantling of strangling regulation. …

onlineanalyst on January 4, 2010 at 8:15 PM

Bravo!

JDPerren on January 5, 2010 at 10:22 AM

Let’s see – Obama is taking away our freedoms one at a time. He’s bankrupting the country. He’s destroying the best healthcare system in the world. He’s taking away the incentive to start your own business. Etc, etc, etc.

But you’re right – we’d be just fine with that if Obama were white.

Idiot.

Squiggy on January 5, 2010 at 6:11 AM

Bush did all that plus put us in a unnecessary war yet there was not the tea bag movement. When it is the Republicans turn for the White House, the Republican President’s policies will be no different from Obama’s policies. The difference will be that the incoming Republican President will be White so the tea bag movement will go away.

I simply do not understand why the tea baggers try to disguise their true motive. You don’t like the fact that the President is Black. Stop with all the “high taxes, bankrupting the country, he is not a citizen” nonsense and state your true motive. I would have a lot more respect for that.

Decider on January 5, 2010 at 11:19 AM

The only divide that counts is liberty vs socialism. If the Republican party is not picking up the tea partiers, it is because they talk too much about conservatism and not enough about liberty.

Framing the Tea Party movement as a conservative movement will chase away libertarians, classic liberals, pro-capitalist/anti-socialist Democrats, Reagan Democrats, etc. and leave a gap for Democrats to pick up those votes.

modifiedcontent on January 5, 2010 at 11:45 AM

The Tea Party movement is not a logical reaction, but an emotional reaction to government fiscal abuse.
I think it’s dangerous to assume an angry person will go into a voting box and vote for a Republican knowing the party is simply less fiscally irresponsible than the Democrats. It’s why a third party is so attractive when people are emotionally upset about the system.

Scranton on January 5, 2010 at 12:42 PM

Decider on January 5, 2010 at 11:19 AM

You do realize that you just admitted to having respect for blatant racism, right?

runawayyyy on January 5, 2010 at 1:11 PM

pjean on January 4, 2010 at 3:50 PM

That’s the greatest vid of all time. It gave me chills! I’m sending it to everyone I know. Don’t post much but just had to thank you for it.

jane1 on January 5, 2010 at 2:26 PM

They already did, after a fashion. Look at the ’08 elections: won with little more than a heaping helping of 0bama-Drama and copying the “party of NO” tactics.

But the momentum is already spent, the left in Congress have betrayed their supporters, and the latter has finally taken notice of the fact. We won’t see a repeat anytime soon.

Dark-Star on January 5, 2010 at 3:27 PM

The Tea Party movement is not a logical reaction, but an emotional reaction to government fiscal abuse.
I think it’s dangerous to assume an angry person will go into a voting box and vote for a Republican knowing the party is simply less fiscally irresponsible than the Democrats. It’s why a third party is so attractive when people are emotionally upset about the system.

Scranton on January 5, 2010 at 12:42 PM

Once Obama is gone the Tea Party movement will die…unless the incoming President is Black also. If the incoming President is White then the Tea Party movement will die regardless of the incoming President’s ideology. The incoming President could be to the Left of Micheal Moore and the Tea Party Movement will not care.

Fiscal abuse has nothing to do with it. That has been happening for 100 years and will continue to happen regardless of whether the President has a (D) or (R) after his/her name.

Decider on January 5, 2010 at 3:30 PM

Independents aren’t going to be comfortable voting for someone who has no record or who doesn’t seem ready for the job.

AnninCA on January 4, 2010 at 4:04 PM

IMHO Annin is saying that even independents can learn and are not happy. A lot of buyer’s remorse out there.

Constitution, small government and low taxes. KISS.

Caststeel on January 5, 2010 at 3:42 PM

One of Andrew Sullivan’s readers started off his letter posted on 05 Jan 2010 01:55 pm as such:

I realize you rarely get to travel in true “teabagger country” but here in rural Mississippi, there is an interesting phenomenon occurring that the Brit Hume brouhaha brings into clearer focus…

Don’t jump to conclusions there, I am sure Andrew Sullivan visits “teabagger country” far more than you give him credit for.

We just have to call him on it.

Mr. Joe on January 5, 2010 at 6:01 PM

Tea Baggers are people who are afraid of a Black President. It has nothing to do with Democrats or taxes or any other so called reason for their being.

Not all Republicans are racists but all racists are Republican. Therefore, Tea Baggers will always be Republican.

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 3:06 PM

I’m not one to call someone out, and I may well get banned from this site, but you sir, are an asshole! You can call me what you like, I don’t care, only I know who I am. You wish to paint people with such a broad brush, go ahead. At least pull your head out of your ass long enough to look at the racism within your party. It goes way back, but is alive and well, right here, right now.

Byrd, Jackson, Sharp ton, Farrakhan, Waters, Jackson-Lee, Clinton, Jones, Carter, Bond, Boxer, Wallace, CARI, Lara’s,ACORN,Fannie/Freddie I could go on forever.

I could give a flying F@%K what color my President is, but I expect him/her to actually give a rats ass about the American people, the guy now in office, not so much.

It does have something to do about taxes, I work my ass off, as bad as things are, I’m holding my own. I really can’t afford more taxes, I don’t want to be taxed out of my home, and I’m close to it.

I own reasonable cars, I have a moderate home, I work 60 hours a week, I have no debt(other than Mortgage) , I live within my means, I pay for my health-care. Trust me, it sucks, I live within my means. That said, I wish not to pay for someone that thinks that work sucks, so they won’t.

To call me a racist, because I don’t fit in your cozy little liberal pigeon hole, “F” YOU!Let me guess, you work for the government, or a union, wuss, get a real job on your own merits, and keep it because you are worth keeping. Your arrogance tells me that your job is protected, try living in the real world, ass wipe.

M-14 2go on January 5, 2010 at 10:24 PM

M-14 2go on January 5, 2010 at 10:24 PM

NICE JOB!

You need to come up with better ‘strategery’ Mr. Decider. Your racism claim isn’t working. Most of us wanted to like him and we tried to like this administration. THEY ARE FAILING. They have no idea how to lead anything. A community organizer directs people to go do “things”. We need someone to step up and say “this is what we are doing, this is when we are doing it, and this is why we are doing it.” This administration is like a group of 12 year olds with the run of a house for a weekend. They are not living in reality.

Some of us were paying attention with Bush, some weren’t. Most of us agree that Bush made plenty of mistakes. So what? We aren’t neanderthals and we have learned from our mistakes. Where are you on that trajectory? Not far, I presume, because you still sit on the bleachers screaming R-A-C-I-S-T.

And Democrats + Tea Party? They aren’t invited.

Yellowdog12 on January 5, 2010 at 10:59 PM

Decider on January 5, 2010 at 3:30 PM

The democrat party owns racism. Their entire platform rests upon it. Break out and think for yourself for once.

daesleeper on January 5, 2010 at 11:06 PM

Oh, you are right. Looks like a modern day KKK rally.

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Whenever D sees a white man, he automatically assumes “racist”. Of course he keeps telling himself that he is unbiased and not a bigot.

MarkTheGreat on January 6, 2010 at 11:34 AM

Oh, you are right. Looks like a modern day KKK rally.

Decider on January 4, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Come back when you can point to one single sheet-wearer or burning cross, libtard, and not a moment before. Photoshops don’t count.

I could sit by the side of the road and read a book in perfect safety as that crowd passed by. But were a ‘black power’ rally heading my way, I’d be taking an express ticket on the Heel & Toe Express in the opposite direction!

Dark-Star on January 6, 2010 at 11:40 AM

Comment pages: 1 2